Cafer Yildirim, Nuray Bayar Muluk, Mustafa Yazir, İskender Yilgör, Cemal Cingi
{"title":"Experimental Study on New Polymer Dressings to Accelerate the Epithelialization in Wound Healing.","authors":"Cafer Yildirim, Nuray Bayar Muluk, Mustafa Yazir, İskender Yilgör, Cemal Cingi","doi":"10.1097/SCS.0000000000011549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this study, the authors applied polymers to an open wound and tried to determine their contribution to its closure or healing process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eighteen adult male Wistar albino rats weighing between 190 and 220 g were used in the experiment. The animals were randomly divided into groups (n=6): group 1, group 2, and group 3. First experimental group (polymer 1, IY-04-109 ) (n=6), second experimental group (polymer 2, IY-04-225) (n=6), third control group (meloline) (n=6). Wounds with a diameter of 0.3cm were created in the dorsal region of the animals; the polymer patches provided were fixed to the wound from both sides with 2 simple sutures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>IY-04-109 and IY-04-225 are similar in composition and synthesis. They should both be biocompatible. Both are polydimethyl silicon-urea copolymers. The differences are that IY-04-109 used a PDMS with a molecular weight of 3200 g/mol, and urea was 13.9%. It was determined that polymer suturing upon the wound surface provided healing with healthy mucosa before scar tissue developed. Both groups, 1 and 2, were better than the control group. Polymer IY-04-225, used in group 2 animals, accelerated the epithelialization faster.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In IY-04-225, a PDMS with a molecular weight of 11,000 g/mol was used. The amount of urea is 9.6%. There is more PDMS in IY-04-225, and the molecular weight of the PDMS is very high. This can lead to differences in polymer surface properties, which may explain why the second group is slightly better.</p>","PeriodicalId":15462,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Craniofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000011549","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: In this study, the authors applied polymers to an open wound and tried to determine their contribution to its closure or healing process.
Methods: Eighteen adult male Wistar albino rats weighing between 190 and 220 g were used in the experiment. The animals were randomly divided into groups (n=6): group 1, group 2, and group 3. First experimental group (polymer 1, IY-04-109 ) (n=6), second experimental group (polymer 2, IY-04-225) (n=6), third control group (meloline) (n=6). Wounds with a diameter of 0.3cm were created in the dorsal region of the animals; the polymer patches provided were fixed to the wound from both sides with 2 simple sutures.
Results: IY-04-109 and IY-04-225 are similar in composition and synthesis. They should both be biocompatible. Both are polydimethyl silicon-urea copolymers. The differences are that IY-04-109 used a PDMS with a molecular weight of 3200 g/mol, and urea was 13.9%. It was determined that polymer suturing upon the wound surface provided healing with healthy mucosa before scar tissue developed. Both groups, 1 and 2, were better than the control group. Polymer IY-04-225, used in group 2 animals, accelerated the epithelialization faster.
Conclusion: In IY-04-225, a PDMS with a molecular weight of 11,000 g/mol was used. The amount of urea is 9.6%. There is more PDMS in IY-04-225, and the molecular weight of the PDMS is very high. This can lead to differences in polymer surface properties, which may explain why the second group is slightly better.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Craniofacial Surgery serves as a forum of communication for all those involved in craniofacial surgery, maxillofacial surgery and pediatric plastic surgery. Coverage ranges from practical aspects of craniofacial surgery to the basic science that underlies surgical practice. The journal publishes original articles, scientific reviews, editorials and invited commentary, abstracts and selected articles from international journals, and occasional international bibliographies in craniofacial surgery.